Armenian vs Icelander Female Poverty
COMPARE
Armenian
Icelander
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Armenians
Icelanders
13.2%
FEMALE POVERTY
70.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
154th/ 347
METRIC RANK
13.0%
FEMALE POVERTY
81.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
141st/ 347
METRIC RANK
Armenian vs Icelander Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 310,749,032 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Armenians and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.211 and weighted average of 13.2%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 159,608,280 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Icelanders and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.234 and weighted average of 13.0%, a difference of 1.5%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Armenian | Icelander |
| Minimum | 2.9% | 0.47% |
| Maximum | 26.9% | 33.3% |
| Range | 24.0% | 32.9% |
| Mean | 12.6% | 11.8% |
| Median | 12.1% | 10.4% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 8.0% | 6.2% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 16.2% | 14.1% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 8.1% | 7.8% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.6% | 7.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.5% | 7.8% |
Demographics Similar to Armenians and Icelanders by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Armenians are Hungarian (13.2%, a difference of 0.040%), Immigrants from Fiji (13.2%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Bosnia and Herzegovina (13.2%, a difference of 0.090%), Immigrants from Northern Africa (13.2%, a difference of 0.19%), and Samoan (13.1%, a difference of 0.39%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Icelanders are Brazilian (13.0%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Malaysia (13.0%, a difference of 0.12%), Afghan (13.0%, a difference of 0.21%), Syrian (13.0%, a difference of 0.24%), and Immigrants from Peru (13.0%, a difference of 0.31%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
| Chileans | 84.7 /100 | #137 | Excellent 12.9% |
| Immigrants | France | 83.6 /100 | #138 | Excellent 12.9% |
| Basques | 83.1 /100 | #139 | Excellent 12.9% |
| Pakistanis | 83.0 /100 | #140 | Excellent 12.9% |
| Icelanders | 81.1 /100 | #141 | Excellent 13.0% |
| Brazilians | 80.5 /100 | #142 | Excellent 13.0% |
| Immigrants | Malaysia | 80.4 /100 | #143 | Excellent 13.0% |
| Afghans | 79.8 /100 | #144 | Good 13.0% |
| Syrians | 79.6 /100 | #145 | Good 13.0% |
| Immigrants | Peru | 79.1 /100 | #146 | Good 13.0% |
| Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 78.6 /100 | #147 | Good 13.0% |
| Yugoslavians | 76.9 /100 | #148 | Good 13.1% |
| Taiwanese | 75.7 /100 | #149 | Good 13.1% |
| Tsimshian | 75.5 /100 | #150 | Good 13.1% |
| Immigrants | Germany | 74.9 /100 | #151 | Good 13.1% |
| Samoans | 73.6 /100 | #152 | Good 13.1% |
| Immigrants | Fiji | 71.0 /100 | #153 | Good 13.2% |
| Armenians | 70.4 /100 | #154 | Good 13.2% |
| Hungarians | 70.1 /100 | #155 | Good 13.2% |
| Immigrants | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 69.7 /100 | #156 | Good 13.2% |
| Immigrants | Northern Africa | 68.8 /100 | #157 | Good 13.2% |